














/ 
7 
J 
: 

1 
7. 


pe 
F Ag: 


e 
* 
F 


Poms 





Let ii el acca li. 


de 














TN ET Avioli eye om mea Re ee 
‘< pci. 








MASTERS OF ARCHITECTURE 


JOHN FRANCIS BENTLEY 
Under the General Liditorship of Stanley C. Ramsey 











AISLE. 


WESTMINSTER CATHEDRAL. 


wie 


JOHN FRANCIS BENTLEY 
BY W. W. SCOTT-MONCRIEFF 


“An artificer, therefore, of anything, if he looks to that which 
is Eternal and from this, as a sort of pattern, designs the form and 
nature of his work, must necessarily produce something wholly 
beautiful—but where he employs for his pattern only that which 
is different from Eternal principles, it cannot be beautiful.” 


Prato, The Timeus. 


WITH 35 ILLUSTRATIONS 
FROM PHOTOGRAPHS BY 
F. R. YERBURY 


NEW YORK 


CHARLES SCRIBNER’S SONS 
1924 





TB 
x 

wr : 
) : 
5 

‘ 





Py 
‘ 

\ 

. aN! 


F r 
‘ t 
“ 
4 
| 
l 
‘ 
* 
’ 
‘ 
' 


4 








2 
Gs: = 
: ~ A ri 
a . 
tae re . 7 
yue . ~ 
= eae > 
pit Oe 
ae | . 
ee eer 
“a . 
aes 
: : - =i! f 
*. 4 - ea s 
a x 
rai ‘a P ae all 
T iid ee 
‘ = a ‘ 
ho = 
¥ sunt" 
. : p 
: rm > 
+ ry co 
- - ~ y . 
e : 7 
sa 5 
,, aly 
by ¢ ae i 
r A] 2» r i} 
* 
te ie » 
ake , 
Z r- . 
, be 
i ~/ ~. 1 
Falta } 
ri ' . 
| 
Sa 
ol 
on ‘i 





po a ae i Pe 


Io. 


ii, 


LIST OF PLATES 


WESTMINSTER CATHEDRAL. AISLE. Frontispiece. 


CHURCH OF THE HOLY ROOD. WATFORD. VIEW FROM THE SOUTH- 
EAST. 


CHURCH OF THE HOLY ROOD. WATFORD. THE TOWER. 


CHURCH OF THE HOLY ROOD. WATFORD. ENTRANCE ON SOUTH 
SIDE. 


CHURCH OF THE HOLY ROOD. WATFORD. ENTRANCE TO BAPTISTERY. 


CHURCH OF THE HOLY ROOD. WATFORD. THE INTERIOR LOOKING 
EAST. 


CHURCH OF THE HOLY ROOD. WATFORD. VIEW OF CHANCEL. 
WESTMINSTER CATHEDRAL. VIEW OF CAMPANILE. 
WESTMINSTER CATHEDRAL. THE ENTRANCE. 

WESTMINSTER CATHEDRAL. DETAIL OF ENTRANCE. 
WESTMINSTER CATHEDRAL. GENERAL VIEW FROM THE SOUTH-WEST. 
WESTMINSTER CATHEDRAL. THE SOUTH FRONT. 
WESTMINSTER CATHEDRAL. DETAIL OF SOUTH FRONT. 
WESTMINSTER CATHEDRAL. THE ARCHBISHOP’S PALACE. 
WESTMINSTER CATHEDRAL. VIEW OF NAVE. 

WESTMINSTER CATHEDRAL. ARCADING IN CHANCEL. 
WESTMINSTER CATHEDRAL. A SIDE CHAPEL. 

WESTMINSTER CATHEDRAL. DETAIL OF A CHAPEL. 
WESTMINSTER CATHEDRAL. VIEW IN AISLE. 

WESTMINSTER CATHEDRAL. INTERIOR SHOWING EAST END. 


WESTMINSTER CATHEDRAL. VIEW IN THE NAVE LOOKING TOWARDS 
THE WEST. 


WESTMINSTER CATHEDRAL, INTERIOR LOOKING EAST. 


WESTMINSTER CATHEDRAL. THE ORGAN LOFT. 


23. 


24. 


At 


206. 


27. 
28. 


29. 


30. 
Bi 
a9) 
33. 
34 


JOHN FRANCIS BENTLEY 


THE CHURCH OF CORPUS CHRISTI. BRIXTON. VIEW OF EXTERIOR. 
SOUTH SIDE. 


THE CHURCH OF CORPUS CHRISTI. BRIXTON. EXTERIOR. VIEW 
FROM SOUTH-EAST. 


THE CHURCH OF CORPUS CHRISTI. BRIXTON. INTERIOR. VIEW OF 
EAST END. 


THE CHURCH OF CORPUS CHRISTI. BRIXTON. VIEW ACROSS TRAN- 
SEPTS. 


BEAUMONT COLLEGE. ST JOHN’S SCHOOL. 
BEAUMONT COLLEGE. ST JOHN’S SCHOOL. SIDE ENTRANCE. 


BEAUMONT COLLEGE. ST JOHN’S SCHOOL. DETAIL OF DOMESTIC 
WING. 


BEAUMONT COLLEGE. THE CHAPEL. EXTERIOR. 

BEAUMONT COLLEGE, THE CHAPEL. INTERIOR. 

BEAUMONT COLLEGE. ST JOHN’S SCHOOL. THE ENTRANCE HALL. 
BEAUMONT COLLEGE. ST JOHN’S SCHOOL. THE CORRIDOR. 


CHURCH IN NOTTINGDALE. THE BAPTISTERY. 


JOHN FRANCIS BENTLEY 


BY W. W. SCOTT-MONCRIEFF 


To most people the name of Bentley is unknown, yet in 
making a study of his early life it is impossible to do so 
without feeling that he is one of those who are favoured, 
perhaps even guided, by that destiny which is specially 
appointed to guard the true welfare of the people. It is 
not the purpose of this appreciation to enter into all the 
details of his career, for this has already been done by 
Mrs de L’H6pital in her book at much greater length than we 
here have space for. Our intention is to arouse an interest 
in his work that it may be known and appreciated by the 
general public. Taking Bentley as an example of a fine 
architect, we shall try to show that in spite of the obstacles 
which lay in his path he rose clear above them all, and left 
behind him some of the most beautiful work done in this 
country since the Middle Ages, and we shall attempt briefly 
to describe the times in which he lived so as to place him 
in a historical environment. 

If it be true that with the turning of the wheel 
of Evolution scientific endeavour is to wane, and art is 
once more to wax and shed her old-time glory around us, 
then to such names as William Morris, Norman Shaw, 
Alfred Stevens, William de Morgan and others we must 
add that of Bentley, and place him among the torch- 
bearers of this advance guard. Such men are the practical 

/ 


JOHN FRANCIS BENTLEY 


idealists of whom the nation may be proud. In spite of 
the neglect and oblivion with which they met, they refused 
to turn aside from beholding their visions, nor could any 
threats of hardship or starvation induce them to betray 
their sacred trust. Those of us who practise some one of 
the arts will realize that to understand men whom we have 
not the privilege to know personally there is not a better 
way than to study their work. In architecture, in sculpture, 
in painting, in the making of furniture—in doing these things 
they say all that can be said about them, and the language 
of the materials they have used speaks more eloquently than 
words. It is possible even for bricks and mortar to be 
adorned with beautiful dreams. 

For those who do not aspire to reflect devotion into 
such an ordinary thing as our Mother Earth this may seem 
difficult to understand. Perhaps only those who know can 
know, yet it is a common experience to see people enter a 
picture gallery or a museum as they would a church, and 
men, more often those said to be uneducated, will instinctively 
take off their hats before the true Spirit of Man. The wonder 
is that we should prefer to praise the ancient towns of the 
foreign countries we visit than to be zealous for the beauty 
of the towns in which we live. It were better to have beauty 
in our homes and in our streets than for it to be guarded at 
great expense in museums and picture galleries. We throw 
off little but ugliness, yet still boast of a civilization. 

8 


JOHN FRANCIS BENTLEY 


First and foremost, therefore, we beg that the word be 
not taken for the deed. To produce a thing of beauty is 
a complete achievement in itself. But let those, who by 
this little appreciation may be so persuaded, go and see 
for themselves the subtle beauties which Bentley prepared 
for them. If they should be touched by the sincerity and 
the sacrifice of his endeavour, they will perhaps ask them- 
selves what is to be obtained from the present ideals of 
speed and convenience. Is it not possible for the public 
to see that the architect and his satellites, the painters, 
poets, musicians, craftsmen, and, last but not least, husband- 
men, if intelligently supported, have more to give to 
the community than picture-theatre actors and mechanical 
maniacs? Perhaps, at long last, our education authorities 
will realize that books can only give us information, and 
knowledge must grow out of acts: as Rembrandt said, ‘“‘ Do 
it and you will know.” If every boy and girl were taught 
to make something with skill and beauty, the time for squad 
drill might be reduced. WHistory is best learnt by learning 
the history of what we make, and matter gives exercise for 
both body and mind, and is the greatest disciplinarian in 
the world. It is also a teacher of patience and humility. 

John Bentley was born in Doncaster in 1839, and baptized 
in the Church of England. ‘This is mentioned because it was 
not until later in life that he became a Catholic. He was the 
son—one of many children—of a wine merchant. As a boy 

9 


JOHN FRANCIS BENTLEY 


he was a maker of things with his hands, and was possessed 
by a keen wish to know how things are made and done. 
Buildings, from early childhood, seem to exercise a mysterious 
influence over him, and he is drawn to them as metal is drawn 
to a magnet. When quite a boy the burning of Doncaster 
church caused him the greatest grief of his childhood, but 
veiled in this grief, as he himself must have recognized in 
after life, was the guiding hand of destiny. 

He took an active and voluntary part in the rebuilding 
of it, and spent all his available time with the Clerk of 
Works who was superintending restoration. From this man 
he undoubtedly learnt some rudiments of his future craft, and 
the experience induced an initial warmth to swell the seed 
latent within him. In 1855, when he was sixteen, he was 
sent to London, bound as an apprentice to a firm of builders, 
to his great joy this, but much against his father’s wish, who 
would have preferred him to enter upon some more merchant- 
like career with more definite chances of making a living. 
But the commercial ideal was not in Bentley’s composition. 
All through his life he cared nothing for money. In the end 
he was sent to London, directly or indirectly, as a result of 
his own will. Doubtless, with youthful intuition, he thus 
secured for himself this first step to freedom from an influence 
likely to draw him away from his natural path. | 

It will always be to the credit of Mr Richard D. Holland, 


a member of the firm to which Bentley was bound, that he 
IO 


JOHN FRANCIS BENTLEY 


should have been released from his articles of apprenticeship. 
This new master did not take long to find out that here was 
stuff too good to be wasted on balancing accounts. Just at this 
time his father died. Arrangements were made, presumably 
at Bentley’s instigation, that he should become an architect. 
In this we can see how youth sometimes sees further and 
more truly than age into the fulfilment of middle life. 
His articles having been cancelled, he entered the office of 
Henry Clutton as an improver. Clutton was one of the 
busiest architects of the Gothic revival. 

And so John Bentley is brought into that protected 
sphere where without interference he may weave his own web 
to his own pattern. There is only one other item of out- 
standing importance which should be mentioned. In 1862, 
at the age of twenty-three, he was received into the Catholic 
Church, with the additional name of Francis. 

_ Bentley’s first real office was at 14 Southampton Street, 
Strand, where he took two rooms overlooking Maiden Lane 
in 1862. To give a hint of his personality the following 
extract from Mrs de |’Hopital’s book is quoted: 

“From Mr Charles Hadfield comes the following de- 
lightful pen portrait of the artist at this period (about 18509), 
which .. . gives a most faithful impression: ‘He was a 
fellow of infinite wit, with a charming manner and a lovable 
and attractive personality which surrounded him with friends. 
He loved association and intimacy with distinguished men, 

| 


JOHN FRANCIS BENTLEY 


his seniors, who appreciated his precocious wit and undoubted 
talent. . . . There was always, even in his moments of fun, 
a straying, far-off look and influence about him, pointing to 
the noble ideals which guided him through life. ... He 
hated snobbery and shams of all kinds, and denounced them 
energetically ; was a hard hitter in an argument, and generally 
scored. At such times his hair used to bristle up, and with 
a face full of determination and intellectual energy he was 
perfectly irresistible.’ ” 

Bentley’s early efforts in the practice of architecture 
follow the usual course of struggles against ignorant clients, 
who, with an exaggerated sense of magnanimity, give petty 
commissions and interfere as much as possible with their 
right execution. 

But before we go any further we shall attempt to write a 
brief description of the times in which Bentley lived and 
practised in order to place him in his historical environment. 

He was born in 1839 and died in 1902. In 1862, 
therefore, when he took his first office, he began to practise in 
the mid-Victorian period. At this time, under the meticulous 
guidance of the Prince Consort, our native and traditional 
philosophy of life became diverted from the old towards that 
of a new kind of progress, and was directed to flow into 
channels leading to a vulgar and purely material ideal of life. 
Indeed, the superhuman energy with which the Prince pursued 


his Germanic schemes of industrial enterprise is extraordinary. 
I2 


JOHN FRANCIS BENTLEY 


According to Mr Lytton Strachey,' the sinister figure of the 
Baron Stockmar, that silent but compelling character, is 
always standing behind Albert as a kind of Muse inspiring 


__a devotee. It was the Baron who arranged the marriage 


with Queen Victoria. It was Albert who ruled the Queen, 
and it was the Baron who shadowed Albert with an inflexible 
will. We see Prince Albert sitting up night after night and 
working himself to a shadow as he plans his schemes for 
turning the British Empire to commercial account. With 
him it became a fixed idea, and he wore himself out in 
his attempt to bring the idea into execution. Both Queen 
Victoria and the Prince Consort regarded the Great Exhibi- 
tion as the crowning glory of their lives. Yet it cannot be 
denied that Albert was throughout, in spite of his foreign 
birth, perhaps one of the greatest patriots, according to his 
lights, this country has ever possessed. The Great Exhibi- 
tion shook England from the indolence into which it had 
sunk during the late Georgian period, but, as we sincerely 
believe, in effect, she jumped from the frying-pan into the fire. 
The reaction, having once set in, grew with furious energy 
and to such purpose as to become altogether unbalanced, and 
to submerge the finer and more noble instincts of the nation. 
Railways threaded lines of communication like spiders’ webs 
all over the country in an incredibly short space of time. 
Canals were bought up lest their competition should prejudice 
1 Life of Queen Victoria. 
5S 


JOHN FRANCIS BENTLEY 


the dividends of the railway companies. Everything, whether 
it was truly economic or not, was sacrificed to this extra- 
ordinary mania, which suddenly swept over the country like 
a tidal wave. In thirty years England transferred all her 
egos into one basket—the basket of commerce. Towns like 
Manchester and Birmingham grew up like mushrooms, bring- 
ing all the evils which we have since been unable to combat, 
and which even now are in danger of strangling the very life 
of the nation. Small hand industries—which in any national 
economy are of the greatest importance—were swept aside. 
The machine and the factory ate up with a titanic appe- 
tite the individual principle in production. Life no longer 
possessed its old quiet charm nor kept its touch with nature. 
Things were made simply to sell and to make markets. For 
a time the national characteristic still kept its lead, but 
gradually the ideal of making things, even by machinery, 
as well as they could be made, gave way before the ever- 
increasing speed of the falling standard. 

And behind it all stood the sinister figure of Baron 
Stockmar and the untiring energy and devotion to the 
country of his adoption of the Prince Consort. The great- 
ness and wonderful personality of Queen Victoria seemed to 
have the effect of a hypnotic influence upon her people. 
They almost worshipped her, and when Albert died the 
heart of England, even of the Empire, went out to her to 
offer comfort in grief. But Victoria was first and before 
14 


JOHN FRANCIS BENTLEY 


everything a woman. For the rest of her life it was Albert 
who reigned in her, and so it was the spirit of Albert who 
still continued to rule England. ; 

Towards the end of Bentley’s life another and un-native 
influence made itself felt. The seeds which had been sown 
in England spread all over Europe and to America, the 
country which was forming, with British stock as _ its 
base, a new race of people. There were gathering together 
sprinklings of most of the nationalities of the world. Fired 
by the example set to them in the Old World the Americans 
seized upon the new ideals with all the energy of a young 
and inexperienced people. Commercialitis—if we may coin 
a word—became with them the disease whose germs were to 
come back to England with redoubled virulence, and our 
country, at the time that Bentley was building his almost 
unnoticed cathedral in Westminster, fell a chronic victim to 
the disorder. The mass of our working people began to 
revolt against this immense industrial machine which was 
becoming their master, and it was with difficulty that Bentley 
could get bricklayers to work peacefully upon the foundations 
of his masterpiece. We cannot penetrate into the future, 
but we have evidence that even the Americans cannot be 
satisfied with the civilization they have built for themselves, 
otherwise they would not flood Europe, seeking peace and 
repose in ancient cities. It is within the bounds of possi- 
bility, however, that mankind, seduced by its worship of the 


a5 


JOHN FRANCIS BENTLEY 


golden calf into a state which borders upon lunacy, will 
turn or be turned from the path which can lead nowhere. 
The blind belief in so-called Science, which in its essence 
is nothing more than an attempt to explain the universe in 
terms of the five senses, will be shaken, and beholding the 
calm and philosophic dignity which the East has maintained 
in all this medley and scramble, the Western World may 
yet come to its senses before it is too late. But this 
would seem almost impossible without some climax of an 
unprecedented nature. 

Such, then, were the times in which Bentley lived. That 
he should have accomplished what he did accomplish is proof 
of his greatness. 

But let us not digress too far from the subject of our 
appreciation. Enough has been said to point out the gap 
which existed between Bentley and his times. Undoubtedly 
he was fortunate in that he worked principally for the Church 
which was the object of his most sincere devotion, and for 
which he would have made, and in fact did make, all the 
sacrifices of his untiring energy. In his case, therefore, there 
was that bond of sympathy between him and those who 
employed him without which fine architecture is an impossi- 
bility. Moreover, the constant stream of commissions which 
flowed into his office kept him busy upon that class of 
building which is devoted to a higher purpose than buying 
and selling or manufacturing masses of goods. 

16 


JOHN FRANCIS BENTLEY 


This close relationship of mutual trust between the 
architect and his employer is of first importance, and perhaps, 
to make our point quite clear, it will be necessary to go 
back to those times when the greatest masterpieces of all 
ages were produced—the period between the twelfth and 
fourteenth centuries. At this time Europe was literally 
showered with architectural miracles. During these centuries 
the employers were their own builders, not in any amateur 
sense, but in the sense of the most highly skilled and most 
devoted men, actually working with their own hands, at no 
financial reward, to express, in what was then held to be the 
sacred symbolism of masonry, the ideals and beliefs which 
were dearer to them than life itself. Medizval master- 
building, or architecture, was thus intense human devotion 
crystallized into materials. This is the secret both of its 
power and its beauty. In our opinion the question of “art” 
did not concern them, but rather they thought, ‘“‘ How can 
we Say all that we feel?” Before the advent of the printing 
press an outlet had to be found for this human aspiration. 
It was found through the medium of materials. Every 
building, every room, every article of furniture, even pots 
and pans and cups and saucers, spoke of a thousand touching 
confidences, as if the workmen felt indebted to our great 
mother that she should receive their thoughts and respond so 
kindly to their emotions. 

The master masons of those days were often highly 


B {7 


JOHN FRANCIS BENTLEY 


educated monks, even saints, who laboured daily with their 
hands. Is it any wonder that in this twentieth century we 
hardly know what beauty is, and when the educated classes 
stoutly refuse to make anything with their hands, how shall 
they ever appreciate truly the efforts of those who know no 
other language than that of workmanship ? 

But the Church in Bentley’s day had become’a victim— 
an unwilling victim—of the changing world, and his employers 
are constantly limited by financial considerations. It was not 
so much a question of whether enough could be found to 
make a building beautiful, but rather would there be enough 
to make it decent? The problem was more easily solved in 
the old days, because gifts were often made in the form of 
either kind or labour, and everything was not translated into 
financial terms as it is now. People gave stone quarries or 
they carted lime to the cathedral site, and sometimes food 
and delicacies for the workmen, and so forth. But Bentley 
had to work in terms of cash, though in the case of the 
cathedral in Westminster many gifts in kind have been 
made. Is there any hope of the old spirit being revived? 
But in spite of all the disadvantages of both circumstance 
and period, there is in Bentley’s work a reflection of that 
real spirit of the grandest medizval monuments which we 
feel to such intensity as we stand wrapt in admiration of 
their supernal loveliness. 

His Church of the Holy Rood at Watford, though still 
18 


JOHN FRANCIS BENTLEY 


seen without the romance with which the gentle fingers of 
time have touched its archetypes, is invested with the same 
memory of celestial beauty and profound and mysterious 
power to appeal to our highest sensibilities. We might 
perhaps define this as the soul of a building whichis always a 
faithful mirror of the motive and of the souls of its builders. 
It is something which is beyond form, beyond technical skill, 
and beyond the influence of time in the sense that new or 
old a building may be the possessor of it, yet without form 
and technical skill it does not and cannot exist for us. These 
most subtle qualities are to be found in Bentley’s work, and 
they give proof of the power of his spirit to transcend the 
disadvantages of modern methods of craftsmanship and the 
mind-killing influence of the machine, for it must be remem- 
bered that Bentley lived and worked through a period which 
perhaps more than any other in the history of the world was 
antagonistic to the most essential conditions for fine achieve- 
ment along the lines of his effort. In effect he and his few 
distinguished contemporaries have just succeeded in breathing 
life into the corpse and so keeping it warm. If a day of 
resurrection should ever dawn, and if the crown of thorns 
should ever burst into flower, men perhaps will at least 
know the names of the long line of immortals who, in 
mortality, have lived and fought for beauty. 

There is the same high level of sensibility to be found 
in his most complete buildings for St John’s preparatory 


B* 19 


JOHN FRANCIS BENTLEY 


school for Beaumont College, near Englefield Green in Surrey. 
Here in every detail, in every form, is the same evidence of 
refinement and inventive power which gives to all his work 
the feeling that he never broke away from tradition, but was 
always trying to revive it. Like most great men, Bentley 
occasionally went clean off the rails—just, as it were, to be 
human. The overdoors in the Hall at St John’s are almost 
a comic instance of this fallibility. 

Space does not permit us to enter into long or technical 
criticisms of his works. They must be seen and allowed to 
speak for themselves. With regard to his cathedral in 
Westminster Mrs de I’H6pital has written a most faithful 
and detailed description of this wonderful building, and her 
book should be consulted. We shall confine ourselves to a 
few remarks about it, and by saying that if this work has not 
found favour with the general public, this is the greatest - 
praise which can be bestowed upon it. We do not wish to 
make out that Westminster Cathedral is a perfect building. 
Perfection in building is always a doubtful quality. That 
it should have been modelled upon the style of the earliest 
Christian churches was a condition which was bound to 
bring about a certain incongruity with the flats and odds 
and ends surrounding it, for there comes a state when false- 
hood is so generally accepted that the truth must seem 
absurd. 

The question as to whom the work should be entrusted 
20 


JOHN FRANCIS BENTLEY 


was a matter of difficulty. A limited competition was pro- 
posed, but when Bentley was asked if he would compete, 
he said that competitions had always been against his 
principles and that he was therefore unable to enter his name 
on the list of those selected. This is an instance of his 
unswerving constancy to idealism. It is believed that, in 
the end, his contemporaries said that he was best qualified 
for the commission, and he was accordingly appointed. 
After Bentley had received the appointment to undertake 
the work, he travelled (in 1894) in Italy, and he spent 
about five months studying the Byzantine buildings at such 
places as Venice and Ravenna. 

It is remarkable that during these travels he never made 
any sketches or drawings, but spent his days in absorbing 
what he saw and at the same time in building his cathedral 
mentally. On his return it was so clearly visualized that 
he was able to draw out his first design and submit it to 
Cardinal Vaughan without delay. 

Then followed a long period of adjustments, in which 
we gather that he was not a little worried by his ecclesiastical 
clients, and this must have been due to inevitable differences 
of opinion arising between the men who did not and the man 
who did know about building. Had Bentley been the 
Cardinal as well as the architect the cathedral would have 
been finer than it is. At the same time, it must be remem- 


bered that had it not been for Cardinal Vaughan’s untiring 
245 


JOHN FRANCIS BENTLEY 


energy in the matter of raising funds, it is doubtful if the 
scheme could ever have been carried out at all. Bentley 
would have been the first man to acknowledge the services 
of his faithful assistant, Mr Marshall, who helped him so 
devotedly, and who is now, at the time of writing, in charge 
of the cathedral works, and is designing and superintending 
the decorations, mosaic work, etc., and seeing that the whole 
conception is being carried out in accordance with its 
author’s intention. Professor W. R. Lethaby, at the con- 
clusion of his introduction to Mrs de l Hopital’s book, says : 

“If I might I would venture to ask for reverence towards 
this remarkable work. It should not be lightly experimented 
with and modified; everything added which is not up to 
the height of Bentley’s work will really count as a sub- 
traction, However costly it may be.” * May the powers that 
be bear this in mind, and so help to preserve a complete 
work as its author would have had it preserved. 

The remarkable things about the building are: first, 
it is a building—a real growth—with sound frame and 
generous structure. There is practically no constructional 
iron in it. It is not a box of tricks. It is no jumble up 
of steel stanchions and compound girders covered with 
fibrous plaster slabs and stupid, meaningless ornament. 
Its bones have real marrow and substance, and its outer 
vesture is an expression of its inner self, as we are symbols 


1 Author’s italics. 
ie 


JOHN FRANCIS BENTLEY 


of our individual selves. Here is no pretty mask covering 
an ugly face, but a frank and honest soul such as we all 
love to meet and know. Secondly, it is possessed of a strange 
and unearthly suggestion of that beauty whose echo we can 
so rarely hear, a beauty which cannot be heard with our 
physical ears, but as the deaf Beethoven listened to the 
heavenly choir. It is a beauty which must be derived from 
the same regions as those which Botticelli and Michelangelo 
inhabited. It beats to the same rhythm as that to which the 
medizeval masters tuned themselves. 

The architecture of all the Gothic revivalists, even 
including G. E. Street, the designer of the Law Courts, 
has a sense of copyism from which Bentley is quite free, 
except in his earlier works. George Frederick Bodley alone 
touches the same level, but his work seems weaker and less 
vital than Bentley’s. In expressing such admiration for the 
work of Bentley, we are in no sense advocating another 
Gothic revival—heaven forbid! Architecture is, like every 
other art, a medium of expression, and the one condition 
which it imposes is that those who follow her should have 
something worthy to express. This, we believe, is her secret. 
The cause of the many ugly buildings in our streets to-day 
is that we are trying to express a worthy purpose when we 
know very well that the purpose is incapable of being 
worthily expressed. For instance, the waxen lady dancing 
in her night attire is not really a fitting motive for the 

a3 


JOHN FRANCIS BENTLEY 


ancient and honourable art of building. Neither shall we 
ever achieve any real beauty out of a cinematograph theatre 
any more than we should expect to improve Liverpool Town 
Hall by turning it into a “ Hall of Varieties.” 

Where Bentley fails he fails from force of circumstances 
beyond his control, and because he was bound by the con- 
ditions of his period. It is these conditions which became the 
defects in his architecture. The early Christian and medizval 
work which he loved, and which makes such a strong appeal 
to the world, was produced by men, as we have said, who 
used materials as symbols by means of which their devotion 
was to be expressed, and who, born and brought up and 
taught to function in accordance with a tradition which 
was no less a thing to them than a stream of sacrifice, 
labour and love, they expressed that devotion directly in 
the materials which they handled, and were not handicapped 
by the thousand and one obstacles which prevent the modern 
workman from doing the same thing—even though he would. 
If we examine carefully the carving and ornament in West- — 
minster Cathedral, we shall find that there is a lack of 
character—a certain want of play and of freedom. It is 
“tight,” mechanical, even too well done, and we cannot help 
feeling that we are looking at masks and not at faces. We 
feel that the workmen have copied from a model, and have 
expressed something essentially foreign to themselves and 
which they do not love or understand. We should express our 
24 


JOHN FRANCIS BENTLEY 


meaning, perhaps, if we say that there is a touch of ‘‘ marriage 
a la mode” in this workman’s wedding with his materials. 
There is not enough suggestion of the sacred character of 
the union. It is an occasion when the guests seem to be 
already apprehensive of a divorce, and have no hope of the 
parties becoming an inseparable duality. But if this is true 
of the craftsmen employed by Bentley, we can only say of the 
general run of modern craftsmanship that there is no attempt 
at marriage even; it is simply a licentious contact, and mean- 
while the spirit of true love, sickened by the sight of this 
spectacle of debauch, turns away—weeping. 

Had Bentley himself carved his capitals this ‘‘ mask” 
element would not have been present, for were this possible 
there would have been a true marriage between the spirit 
of the creator and the materials with which he was creating. 
Instead of this Bentley made drawings—very careful draw- 
ings (as he was bound to do under modern conditions)—and 
these, being copied by workmen, produced the inevitable 
result. If it were possible for the Churches to found an Order 
of monks sworn to celibacy, mendicancy and obedience, and 
to believe and preach the belief that work is sacred and 
themselves to be expert and devoted workmen, such an 
Order would have a far-reaching influence. Centres might 
be established all over the country. Traditions could be re- 
established and preserved in their monasteries. We make 
this suggestion in all seriousness. 


a 


JOHN FRANCIS BENTLEY 


It is the complications which prevent direct expression 
that we complain about. It is these which rob both life 
and character from workmanship. Everything was done in 
the old days by man or animal power. There was the 
element of immense life sacrifice directly transmuted to 
everything done, and a sense that materials, since they form 
creation, were to be treated with reverence. 

To-day the machine has destroyed all this subtle feeling 
and belief. A plank is ripped up in a few minutes, and this 
destroys the workman’s feeling and his delicacy of touch ; he 
develops a sort of sense of superiority over the thing which 
he sees to be rent with a circular saw, and he becomes 
deluded into the belief that the power in the machine, 
with its apparent saving of labour, is the real god. ‘The 
element of sacrifice is withheld, and the quarrel and final 
divorce is inevitable. 

Nevertheless Bentley, during the building of his cathe- 
dral, must have trained a considerable number of craftsmen 
in the early Christian tradition. It is a thousand pities 
that such men should have been so trained to the point at 
which they could almost found a school of craftsmanship on 
individual rather than on commercial lines, and if the leading 
architectural societies in this country would keep a record of 
such men as have worked on Westminster or Liverpool 
cathedrals, or other great public buildings, they would further 
the cause which they were founded to protect. 

26 


JOHN FRANCIS BENTLEY 


Out of all the wealth of symbolism and fine effort at 
Westminster, how many names of the actual carvers have 
been preserved? Like ghosts they fade into the background, 
their labour and sacrifice as individuals unnoticed and un- 
remembered. Yet they have their reward. Something of 
their own spirit shall still live in the things which they 
made with their hands, and doubtless in making images 
here they have made for themselves a reality elsewhere. 

Of one thing we may be certain, that where there is 
machinery there can never be true beauty. It is as certain 
as the law which we know as the Law of Gravity, which 
endures always and everywhere. But in spite of this, as 
we have said, there is an echo of that ancient chord in 
Bentley’s work. How has this been restruck, in spite of 
the adverse conditions we have mentioned ? 

Let us, in the mind, stand once more looking at the 
stained glass in Chartres Cathedral, and seeing in this work 
the archetype of what Bentley strove to express, attempt to 
say why it is possessed of such miraculous beauty. Here 
is something grander than the grandest literature; here is 
something more lovely than the sweetest music; yet it is 
only pieces of glass, lead and iron, and three primary colours. 
Why should we be so moved? Is it because of the intense 
feeling of reality which is conveyed to us? But nothing 
could be more unreal. And if it is not the real which affects 
us, it must be that which is unreal or does not exist. Yet 

27 


JOHN FRANCIS BENTLEY 


why should what does not exist affect us so deeply? 
Shall we say that that which we call “reality” is only a 
shadow, and is perceived only by its like, and that we 
are so affected because the reality, amid all the changes of 
seeming reality, can only be perceived by means of symbols, 
and that it is this most mysterious symbolism which under- 
lies all art and awakens within us, as it were, faint echoes 
of that reality which is now become strange? 


John Francis Bentley died in 1902, before his work at 
Westminster was finished. ‘Spectacles and pencil were left 
upon the unfinished drawing, when, later in the afternoon, 
he passed out of his office for the last time.” He was a 
lover of wisdom, a geometrician, and a master of symbolism. 
Still more important perhaps—he was a poet. 


Turnbull & Spears, Printers, Edinburgh 











’ 








WATFORD. 


CHURCH) OF THE HOLY ROOD 


PLATE 1 


RAST, 


M THE SOULH 


VIEW FRO 





oe) 


fa 


ua 





THE LOW ER; 


CHURCH OF THE HOLY ROOD: WATFORD. 


PLATE 2; 








PEATE*$3),. CHURCH OF THE HOLY ROOD, \WATFORD, 
ENTRANCE ON SOUTH SIDE. 











WATFORD. 


CHURCH OF THE HOLY ROOD: 


PLATE 4 


ENTRANCE TO BAPTISTERY. 


a 





end =< 
* 
<a 
' 
- 
» 
Le 
> 
eB aN hae 
* 
oe 
oo 
2 
¥ 
+o ESO ne Se) Se 
ma 
* 
* 
“ 
« 
Po ss 
Pre 
a 
' < 
j ' 
= 
\ 
bas 7 ® Lt 
x 
© +m 
ver 
“J 7 24 
‘ 
1 
. 
- . q 
e 
i 
‘ 
¥ ps 
] 
rf s 
q A> is 
. . 
'\ 
ihe = ] 








MeATHs> a CllURCH OF TH bantODY ROODsA\VALEORD: 
DEE INTERIOR LOOKING EAST. 





“IHAONVHO AO MHIA ‘GUOALVM ‘“GOOU ATIOH AHL AO HONNHOD 9 8LViId 





“7 . WE 7 
- > ¢ 
ad 
‘ 
ay 
a 
bi 
' 
a 


—s 


. 











VESTMINSTER CATHEDRAL. VIEW OF CAMPANILE. 


PLATE 7. 





AP LINE Bes mg: 


+ wae, 








PLATE 8. WESTMINSTER CATHEDRAL. THE ENTRANCE, 








PLate 9. WESTMINSTER CATHEDRAL. DETAIL OF ENTRANCE. 


de eee 


oh alan a irre GS Wim Kena at eh es & 








PLATE 10. WESTMINSTER CATHEDRAL. GENERAL VIEW FROM THE 
SOUTH-WEST. 


| 





‘LNOWA HLNOS AHL “IVAYGCHHLIVO WALSNINISAM “CII ALvIg 





= 


> 
. 








PUATE 12. WESTMINSTER CATHEDRAL. DETAIL OF SOUTH.FRONT. 





~ 


etd cs cele 


tee ame 


~ ob eee | Oe ee ae Sie eee DF ee ae eae a ee 
= ~« ~ 





or | 


nn 


a 
nee 


©) 
A 





CHBISHOPR SePALACE, 


ER CATHEDRAL, -THEVAR 


WESTMINST 


ELATE S13 


w= es 








VIEW OF NAVE, 


WESTMINSTER CATHEDRAL. 


PLATE 14 





« al ae ¥ en pe ee ee een ee ° ey a « a ‘ : one ae Be ord Mie A, aloha 





ARCADING IN CHANCEL: 


WESTMINSTER CATHEDRAL, 


PLATE 15. 


e@ 


a een eit sem: 


ye 


ed 


Ads wy 





ole 


4 


WESTMINSTER CATHEDRAL. A SIDE CHAP} 


PLATE 16; 


=i ag ee 
5.2 





ee oe ee ee ae ee ee 


| 
\ 


Si || a 2 ai 2 te |p 1 seme «6 


Bor os 








DETAILS OF CAL CHAPREE. 


WESTMINSTER CATHEDRAL 


PEATE 17. 


ee iteeied cmeiiee — eameiean + leet mney ame teapine, & 


5 gpm Non se ng aes dt Pe ag 


So ascii cone annem Aa 


cect ge i eri py ant seesaw eat ranches inane * 








PLATE 18. WESTMINSTER CATHEDRAL. VIEW IN AISLE: 


“ 


+ 





Ww 


2 of » 


* 


vata | 
fa @ Vie 


le 


iy 


om 
% 


| 


aac) 


end 





INTERIORS SHOWING EASISEND, 


WESTMINSTER CATHEDRAL. 


PLATE I9. 


“\ 








Prati 20.8 WESTMINSTER, CATHEDRAL. VIEW IN THE NAVE 
LOOKING TOWARDS THE WEST. 


fo 
‘ 
; 
, 
? 
re 
Ei, 
- & ; 
* ; 
* 
2) " 72 6 
- ; 





~~ ae 


eel 


PLATE 21. WESTMINSTER CATHEDRAL. INTERIOR LOOKING EAST. 





- 





oy) Pen 
mS a eo Saal, 








THE ORGAN LOFT. 


WESTMINSTER CATHEDRAL. 


SPLATE 22. 


cccecesor ne 
hee 





PeAtE 2301 HE CHURCH OF:CORPUS CHRISTE. BRIXTON, 
VIEW OF EXTERIOR: “SOULTHISIDE, 








PEATE 2A0e0l tl HSCHURCH OF CORPUS CHRIS TIeABRIXTON, 
EXTERIOR. VIEW FROM SOUTH-EAST. 


GS 


+ eae 


i Es 
nares 





. 


BRIXTON 


THPeGHURCH OF CORPUS CHRISTI 


25, 


PLATE 


VIEW OF EAST END 


INTERIOR. 


a aS 











DoLON: 


I 


THE CHURCH OF CORPUS CHRISTI. BR 


PLATE 26. 


VIEW ACROSS TRANSEPTS 


Mite Ace 


— 


“ 


1.8 


wre pet OF 


genie 
- 


Bm Peery seal enced sien o 





"IOOHOS S.NHO[ LS ‘ADATION LNOWNVA 





‘LOe a LVited 


A 





¥ ‘ 
a 6 Ma ¢ 





| J 
, ; | 
a > ‘ 
pe 
“y : F 
/ ‘ .% 
ae a | ; 
| 
cn ne 4 
ear | 
poy Md 
ae. 4 \ 





PLATE 28. 


BEAUMONT 





COLLEGE. ST JOHN’S SCHOOL. SIDE ENTRANCE. 





PLATE 29. BEAUMONT COLLEGE. ST JOHN’S SCHOOL. 
DETAIL OF DOMESTIC WING, 


or 








LHI 


Hi 


HH 


m7 


H 





EXTERIOR. 


THE CHAPEL. 


BEAUMONT COLLEGE. 


PLATE 30. 





| 





INTERIOR. 


THe CHARI. 


BEAUMONT COLLEGE. 


31 


LATE 


P 








ELATE 32.5 BEAUMONT COLLEGE. ST JOHN’S SCHOOL. THE ENTRANCE HALL. 


ny 


re 
' 





ee ey 





Pirate. 33) BEAUMONT COLLEGE. ST JOHN’S SCHOOL. THE CORRIDOR. 





‘ ~ ms 7 
Ls - ® , J 
sor 
’ & + 7 . - : J Mi 
’ - .. 
: i . J 7 
i ‘ ‘ 
LS 4 
* f a 
‘ " y 
° ‘ 
a ‘ 
ee. : 
4 ‘ 7 U s : 
{ 
s a . } 
+ + | 
=. 3 . - r 
ce" , 
‘ i 7 
- . bam 
7 . « 
' t 8: . 7 : py 
. , 
’ 
- . - . 


ee 7 : : ‘ : ) 





oO eb 


Ei; 


cn anpaminnetineteadigeneneaed 


apnoea et separ 


eN 
al 
wy 





THE BAPTISTERY. 


CHURGH IN SNOVEINGDALE 


PLATE 34 


. 
h ¢ 
2 . 
. 
. * é . . i % A 
, 
‘ . . 
. 
Z 
F 
. 
. 
j 
? : 5 ‘ 
=~ re 
—_— < 
' 
= a, : - ’ 
rt ae een ae 4 ; 
7 ¢ . nf 
0 | 
+4 — a 
yy h- ~ a - 
ea . 
MG i 
° 4 . . 
- 
= 
o - 
~ > 











j Nie ; c 
f 

mt A. ' 

eee AY 3 : ‘ is 
1 ir 4 a 
: ‘Wi 1 ; 
z ‘ aly _ ; E 

A ‘ 





‘ t ; 
i \ r 
% t ’ + 
\ , ’ ‘ 
' 
» u 
‘ 7 4 
* a , 
mi ‘ ? 
, ‘ 
; 
‘ 
i 
Oe : 
= 1 
‘ 
] 
4 : . 
: F 
J 
, 
r 
% oe 
ee ie 
* 
a 
» 4 
be 
: * 
1 
4 
5 
‘ 
. 
; 
. Ap 











' 
. 
’ ‘ , 
ee aes \ 
» s 
* f 
te 
PAI ; 
‘ f rN f 
i « ‘ 4 i 
, ng * i 
I « 
J 
Ms ; : 
: < 
i 
. , 
e \ 
\ i 
\ | i y \ 4 ? 
' y us ‘ ‘ 
. ; 
: 4 : 3 
f ‘ kA? 
t! Hi 
i “ } : + i 
. wy 8 : & , 
i > et 
: pide iY 
. y ‘ A ; 
’ Vinewrs at , ’ : Lu >, 
a 1 4 > 7 
‘ eat ej 1 . j j . r ‘ 
f * ‘ 
¢ i akee * ei oN , ; ‘ ri 
‘i } cys , tan t ; 
‘ a4) vas ‘ f 
: +e. ,. 2 
7 > t Bs CoAt a» 
+ , ‘ J a vi 0 
‘ To V 4 x 4 ‘ i» 
Vet Weel Ay . P , I 
, iene bak Nt 
a * r Wah ee 
sys a5 Ay r \ 
yee Ny TY abs 
‘ 4 - ° rs 








——————————— 


GETTY CENTER LIBRARY 





